Дзвер1, това, че не си съгласен, че в примера с бомбата има парадокс няма нищо лошо. Хората са различни и имат най-разнообразни мнения. Лошото е, че не можа да ми дадеш убедителен аргумент, че в примера няма парадокс. Забележи, не е само това, че

"макар че от някои отправни с-ми влакът и бомбата изглеждат леко сплескани",

а това, че използвайки СТО излиза, че влакът е цял, въпреки истината, въпреки непреодолимия факт, че влакът е унищожен.

Ето и сега с тези костенурки. Нима нещо друго има значение освен истината по въпроса ? Пак ти казвам, ако наблюдателят върху втората костенурка знае истината няма никакъв проблем.

Но хайде стига с тези влакове, бомби и костенурки … :- )

Ето ти текста от NYTimes:



March 23, 2002

Defense Department Agency Severs Its Ties to an Elite Panel of Scientists

By JAMES GLANZ

Тhe Pentagon has abruptly severed its ties with a secretive advisory panel of elite scientists, leading to accusations that the country is blunting its ability to deal with increasingly sophisticated terrorists and other foes after Sept. 11.

The move by the Pentagon, which was first reported yesterday by National Public Radio, took place under contentious circumstances whose details are a matter of dispute between the panel, called Jason, and the Defense Department agency that dropped Jason's contract, worth more than $2 million.

The Pentagon has countless in-house scientists and engineers to assess its security strategy. But since the days of the hydrogen bomb and the "missile gap," Jason has been one of the few - and certainly the most prestigious - sources of advice outside the defense establishment, looking for developing threats and assessing futuristic weaponry. Its 40 to 50 members include Nobel laureates and some of the brightest young scientists in the nation.

"The Jasons are one of the few organizations within the scientific community that are willing to get into the scientific details relevant to classified work," Dr. John H. Marburger III, the science adviser to President Bush, said in an interview yesterday. "They tend to be working scientists - top-notch people who are experts in their fields."

Dr. Marburger declined to comment directly on the failure to renew the contract.

According to members of Jason, the Defense Department agency wanted the panel to accept two Silicon Valley executives and another Washington insider with an engineering degree into its ranks. When the panel refused, the agency, called the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or Darpa, ended the contract.

Though Darpa refused yesterday to confirm the dispute over the nominees, a spokeswoman said the move was in fact a reflection of Jason's inability to adjust its priorities to a post-cold-war world, where the physical sciences are no longer as important as information and computer sciences to the nation's security.

In the past, said the spokeswoman, Jan Walker, "they looked at things like submarine detection, things that were very heavily physics oriented." But since then, Ms. Walker said, information technology became much more important and Jason did not adapt. "It was on this basis that led to the view not to continue the Darpa funding," she said.

But Dr. Steven Block, a Jason member who is a professor of biological sciences at Stanford, said those contentions were a smoke screen in front of an attempt to place political appointees to a scientific advisory panel.

"Darpa's attempt to turn Jason into a political patronage job challenges the very independence that makes Jason so useful," Dr. Block said.

Citing what is now regarded as a prescient 1999 study by Jason on bioterrorism, and others on nanotechnology and information, Dr. Block denied that the panel focused too exclusively on physics. The events of Sept. 11, he said, made the group's blue-sky strategizing even more critical.

A Jason member said the group was negotiating with another Defense Department agency in hope of continuing its work. Still, Dr. Henry Kelly, president of the Federation of American Scientists and an official in the Clinton administration's Office of Science and Technology Policy, called the development worrisome.

"Jason has been an absolutely key tool over the years," Dr. Kelly said. "Losing it even for a short period of time is a great blow."

Dr. Marburger said he hoped the panel could come to a new arrangement with the Pentagon. He added that he had not been consulted on the move, but would not have expected to have been.

Because of its independent and highly academic nature, Jason has never been an easy match with the disciplined culture of the Pentagon. The uncertain origin of its name is one illustration of the panel's unconventional culture. By some accounts, Jason derives from the mythical seeker of the golden fleece. By others, it is an acronym for the months when it first came into being: July, August, September, October, November. Another theory refers to a common fact of the members' resumes: Junior Achiever, Somewhat Older Now.

A former Darpa director and a recipient of the President's National Medal of Science, Dr. George Heilmeier, said the agency's decision to change its orientation was not surprising.

"I do think that every once in a while, you have to rebalance based on the technologies which are important at the time," Dr. Heilmeier said.

But he added that in his three-year tenure as the Darpa head in the 1970's, the panel's brilliance and unpredictability was a resource he would not have wanted to do without.

"You could say that if you have a group like Jasons and every couple of years they hit pay dirt, you're getting your money's worth."



А принципът на който работят CD-тата е бил известен и по времето, когато сме били малки. Проблемът, който се е дискутирал тогава е не дали принципно подобно нещо е възможно (такава принципна възможност никой не е оспорвал), а това дали подобни неща могат да станат технологии и да променят обществото, да не говорим да станат бизнес и да се печелят милиарди от него. Когато бяхме малки въпроси на бизнеса даже не се и разискваха.